Default billing for ar coat

[vaderkty]

Can you please allow multiple billing codes for coating in your frames page defaults. We HAVE to bill for UV for insurance but our staff doesn't always remember to add it when selecting an ar with UV (Crizal UV, Avance, UV, etc.) This is costing us $16.00 a job in lost revenue (not including lab chargebacks cost). It is easy for me to add the UV to the ar it affects if you gave me the option to "double up" billing codes the way we can on progressives.

[mdeyedoc]

That is such a PITA that VSP does that. They should just make those AR-UV coatings a separate grade of AR coat with the appropriate add on fee. We don't usually use Crizal, etc AR coatings but we ordered a special lens last week and we had to use Alize or Avance coatings. I believe when I looked it up in the VSP product guide, the pt add-on fee for UV with AR is different from the standard UV.
Marcia

[vaderkty]

I love the fact I could "idiot proof" the other lenses so Trans, Digital, etc didn't get missed. (They used paper to do this until I forced them to get Crystal after interviewing 30 different companies. They won for price, service, ease of use and ability to request things to make it MORE idiot proof). They were losing money on co-pays and little things like this with every order and had NO way of tracking it.

It's not just VSP. They are all leaning towards this. I think it's unethical to charge a patient for UV on an ar that the material is already UV. It's all marketing to make an "informed consumer" but it's really just another way to nickel and dime a pt out of more money. I ONLY have to charge the pt. because I have to pay it. I think it's a ridiculous waste of money and avoid it at all cost!

[peter@crystalpm]

Jul 19, 2014 15:51:45 GMT -6 vaderkty said:

Can you please allow multiple billing codes for coating in your frames page defaults.

I just wanted to drop a note here to let you know that we're looking into it.  No promises.